Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Go fuck yourselves FSG


Neil G
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

But there we have it scooby. Some of our fans are so obsessed with defending these owners, they can't even see the result on the pitch before feeling good about their latest gobble. 

Some of our fans are so obsessed with criticising the owners, they can’t even wait for the end of the window for criticising them for not spending. Even then it won’t be enough, won’t be paid at the right time, and it’ll be because they’re aiming for fourth. Wibble. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This FSG/Beane stuff is suspicious. Beane wanted a football club, but if he'd have bought a percentage of the club, then there would have been public expectations that the money was invested back in us, either through stadium or players, but as they're going the percentage of FSG route, it gets them to the same place but no one will be asking why that money isn't going back into us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Horus said:

This FSG/Beane stuff is suspicious. Beane wanted a football club, but if he'd have bought a percentage of the club, then there would have been public expectations that the money was invested back in us, either through stadium or players, but as they're going the percentage of FSG route, it gets them to the same place but no one will be asking why that money isn't going back into us. 

I don't expect a penny into us out of anyone who's investing to get a monetary return. As that article says Beane has 500m and is finding another 1bn if the bid is supported. But it would feel the outcome from there would be floating the business on the stock market. I see that as having an even more negative effect for us, because there will be an expectation to return a dividend. FSG on bed with another bunch of PE leaches can't possibly spell anything positive for us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

Liverpool FC and Expedia, one of the world's largest full-service travel sites, have set off on a multi-year agreement that will position the travel platform as a principal partner of the club, landing on the shirt sleeve of both men's and women's team kit. ( @LFC ) https://t.co/uzfTKrc5x5

I heard that earlier. You'd think Expedia would be fucking skint and with nobody travelling not too worried about advertising. I'd be interested to know what sort of deal we got

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

I heard that earlier. You'd think Expedia would be fucking skint and with nobody travelling not too worried about advertising. I'd be interested to know what sort of deal we got

Free upgrades to the first class lounge at John Lennon...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

I heard that earlier. You'd think Expedia would be fucking skint and with nobody travelling not too worried about advertising. I'd be interested to know what sort of deal we got

There's still been no explanation as to why Western union stopped their deal. Originally they signed a 5 year deal but ended it after 3. Wasnt due to the pandemic either. 

 

They paid Lfc £5m a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

There's still been no explanation as to why Western union stopped their deal. Originally they signed a 5 year deal but ended it after 3. Wasnt due to the pandemic either. 

 

They paid Lfc £5m a year.

“Western Union’s sponsorship of Liverpool Football Club has been very successful for both our business and our brand and we are very proud of what we and the club have achieved over the last three seasons.

 

“However, we evaluate all of our activity, including sponsorships, on a regular basis, and as our business and brand needs and objectives continue to evolve, we have made the decision not to continue with the Liverpool Football Club sponsorship beyond the end of this season.

“We wish Liverpool FC continued success in the future and would like to thank everyone at the club for their support over the years.”

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Doctor Troy said:

There's still been no explanation as to why Western union stopped their deal. Originally they signed a 5 year deal but ended it after 3. Wasnt due to the pandemic either. 

 

They paid Lfc £5m a year.

My guess is there was probably a step up in cost if we became champions or something and if they didn't want to pay that new cost, they could walk away for a small price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

My guess is there was probably a step up in cost if we became champions or something and if they didn't want to pay that new cost, they could walk away for a small price. 

That's exactly what I thought. I bet we wanted them to extend their contract at a higher price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's frequently a break clause at the 3 year point in many contracts. What WU are saying is it was a commercial decision. That could mean they only ever intended the deal to be for 3 years, they were not getting the exposure or increased business they expected via the deal or there was an increase due related to club performance.

 

On it's own, that seems the weakest suggestion to me seeing as the idea of sponsoring a sports club is to ride the back of their increasing success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mate does this for a living and runs his own acency. He was telling me the thing with this sleeve sponsorship stuff though, people are still working out it's real value. The price is not really related to the slot on the shirt, it is the commercial commitments the club will give around access to players, joint initiatives on social media or just plain access to our social media numbers. Social media drives more of the associated cost of the sleeve sponsor than the slot on the shirt. Arsenal get double what we did for WU, but we are not comparing like for like deals as arsenal might well be doing far more behind the scenes with their sleeve sponsor. We might not have that possibility due to commitments with other sponsors (so if you think of the exposure we give Nivea, yet they are not a primary sponsor, although I'm not sure they're a partner any more as that arrangement may have finished last year too). WU walking away because it might be as simple as they over estimated what the social media was worth or something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Doctor Troy said:

There's still been no explanation as to why Western union stopped their deal. Originally they signed a 5 year deal but ended it after 3. Wasnt due to the pandemic either. 

 

They paid Lfc £5m a year.

Perhaps they were paying us through Western Union.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...